On Wed, 2004-04-21 at 16:14 +0100, David M. Wilson wrote: > On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 09:06:10AM -0600, Craig Kelley wrote:
>
> > I would like to uniquely tag a message after it's been "seen" by a
> > transport. I was thinking of something like this:
> >
> > headers_add = X-Done-Spamcheck: ${md5:thisisthespamsecret$h_Message-ID:}
> >
> > Where "thisisthespamsecret" would be the "secret" and the Message-ID
> > would be the unique bit of information in an email. I'm worried that
> > Message-ID may be null at some point though? Is there a better string
> > expansion to use as some sort of unique identifier?
>
> Hi Craig,
>
> The usefulness of this is questionable - you may be better to just have
> an X-is-spam: header. That way all spammers can do is flag themselves as
> spam.
I considered that idea, but we do not drop any emails based on spam
heuristics; it's only there to alter the subject and allow end-users to
filter it if they choose. If I simply add some header like "X-Spam-
Seen" or rely on the Spamasssassin headers, then those can be forged by
the spammers (no?). I could remove the Spamassassin headers, if they
are present, in the first router -- but then when messages are re-sent
via mailman and other software, it has to check it again.
